KISHORE CHANDRA MOHANTA Vs. MAKARA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners by way of this application U/S. 482 of Cr.P.C. seek to quash the order passed on 5/8/2015 by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Bamanghaty, Rairangpur in C.M.C. No. 49 of 2013 converting the proceeding U/S. 145 to 147 of the Cr.P.C.

(2.) The facts in precise are petitioners and the opposite parties are neighbours to each other and it is alleged that on being instigated by plaintiff in C.S. No. 11 of 2013, the opposite parties tried to encroach upon the remaining land of the petitioners in Plot No. 496 and 435 of Khata No. 1 kisam 'Bari' and 'Gharabari' by claiming the same to be their right of way for ingress and egress from their residential plot in land No. 434 through land in plot No. 497 recorded as 'Sarbasadharana Rasta' and thereby, forced the petitioners to lodge an FIR against opposite parties who subsequently also lodged an FIR against the petitioners. The police on receipt of these two FIRs, submitted a PR requesting initiation of a proceeding U/s. 145 of Cr.P.C. by arraying the present petitioners as second parties and opposite parties as first parties before the S.D.M., Bamanghaty, Rairangpur with a prayer for direction to remove the fence over plot No. 435 and 496 belonging to the petitioners and thereafter, the learned SDM, Bamanghaty, Rairangpur by an order passed on 19/10/2013 initiated a proceeding U/S. 145 of Cr.P.C. calling upon both first parties and second parties to appear before him and submit written statement of their respective claims by 13/11/2013 by directing the local police to remove obstacles from the passage with immediate effect, but such order was unsuccessfully challenged before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rairangpur in Criminal Revision No. 06 of 2013. The learned SDM Bamanghaty, Rairangpur after recording the evidence of witness No.1 for first parties (opposite parties herein) deferred the cross-examination of said witness to 25/4/2015, but subsequently on two petitions of the first parties (opposite parties herein), invited objections from the petitioners-cum-second parties and after hearing both the parties passed the impugned order on 5/8/2015 converting the proceeding to one U/S. 147 of the Cr.P.C. Hence, present CRLMC.

(3.) Mr.S.K.Patnaik, learned counsel for the petitioners has challenged the impugned order mainly on the ground that without calling for any further report, the learned Magistrate has converted the proceeding to one U/S. 147 of Cr.P.C., especially when there is a civil suit pending for adjudication in the matter.